patrick.net

https://drpanda.substack.com/p/covid-19-deaths-in-2022-were-39-higher

COVID-19 deaths in 2022 were 39% higher than 2021
Media is silent

My personal experience so far is, "nothing to see here" regarding covid or the jab.

Patrick says

Could it be because the jabbed, on average, are older than the unjabbed?

GNL says

Patrick says

Could it be because the jabbed, on average, are older than the unjabbed?

Even if so, it shows the jab as ineffective.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/what-federal-public-health-in-canada

Gazit et alshowed that “SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13-fold (95% CI, 8-21) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected.” When adjusting for the time of disease/vaccine, there was a 27-fold increased risk (95% CI, 13-57).

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/exploding-the-myth-that-covid-jabs

Exploding the myth that Covid jabs protect against death in two charts
The public health industry (yes, it's an industry) relies on bad math and worse data collection to argue the Covid shots work. But the truth is out there.

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/on-friendship-with-self-righteous

Yes, the Aussies are paying funeral expensed for those who can prove death caused by jab:

https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccine-claims-scheme

https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/deceased-covid-19-vaccine-recipient-payments-and-funeral-costs-you-can-claim-through-covid-19?context=55953

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/sad-turtles-saturday-may-6-2023-c?publication_id=463409&post_id=119691312&isFreemail=true

Brilliant professor Norman Fenton published a simple spreadsheet analysis on YouTube explaining the reason the CDC didn’t count people as vaccinated until 2 weeks after their second jab.

It’s a statistical shell game.

I’ll give you the gist so you don’t need to watch the whole explainer video, but if you want to see the details, it’s all there, linked below. The basic idea is, if you shift forward the window of vaccinated infections (or hospitalizations) by calling jabbed people “unvaccinated,” you increase the unvaxxed numbers and reduce the number of vaxxed showing infected/hospitalized.

So far, we already knew all that. It was a way to make the unvaxxed look bad. But the statistical effect ripples forward for several months before the two groups catch up, so the numerical efficacy calculations falsely show a “scientific” benefit for the jabs. The jabs could just as well have been a placebo, and you’d see the exact same apparent benefit. By calculating efficacy this way, by time-shifting the vaxxed cohort, it created fake, artificially-high efficacy numbers.

No better than saline.

But eventually you get to a point where the time-shift doesn’t provide much statistical benefit, the numbers catch up with each other, but by that point, they just call it “waning efficacy,” and roll out the boosters, creating another 2-week time shift where — think about this — even people who’d already had two original shots suddenly became “unvaccinated” again for another two weeks, creating another time-shift and more fake inflated efficacy results.

Because of the time-shifting, it is entirely possible that the jabs had no efficacy at all, they were placebos with a bonus Russian-roulette feature. To figure it out, the efficacy calculations must be re-done, accounting for the time-shift. And while they’re at it, they could use absolute risk reduction instead of relative risk reduction.

But that would spoil all the fun, wouldn’t it?

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/potato-blues-wednesday-may-10-2023?publication_id=463409&post_id=120494736&isFreemail=true

MedRxIV published a Cleveland Clinic study pre-print titled “Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Bivalent Vaccine.”

It should have been titled, the “NON-Effectiveness of the Covid Vaccine,” or “Risks of the Covid Vaccine.”

The short version is the prestigious researchers found that the more jabs a person took, the more likely it was they’d catch symptomatic covid.

https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/84118.html

THE RICHIE ALLEN SHOW MONDAY MARCH 13TH 2023

"Richie is joined by Professor Norman Fenton. Esteemed Professors Norman Fenton and Martin Neil launched a newsletter to challenge the credibility of the global response to covid-19 and expose how governments and their advisers use and abuse statistics to fit their narratives. ...

DR. NORMAN FENTON: Nobody I don't think anybody seriously believes the vaccines are effective at stopping infection transmission. We know that was a lie, right? We do know that's a lie and everybody kind of accepts that now, right? But what's remarkable is that they have sustained what is just as equally a big lie, which is that the vaccines, although they don't stop that transmission, infection transmission they stop people being seriously ill and dying of covid, right? How often do we hear that mantra? You know you get the, all of these media celebrities and politicians saying you know, oh, I'm really ill with covid but thank God for my five jabs whatever—

RICHIE ALLEN: Yeah, yeah.

DR. NORMAN FENTON: — otherwise it would have been so much worse, right? You get people like Julia Hartley-Brewer, right, who was supposedly you know one of the main challengers of the official covid narrative, she still bangs on even today about, you know, the jabs still stop you becoming seriously ill and dying with covid.* I mean it's, it's incredible. But that, that has been maintained because that one, that we have completely, we have completely destroyed that narrative. The idea that you can't become seriously ill, hospitalized and die after having been vaccinated, is the one perpetual myth that just they can't seem to let go of. And they can't let go of it because once you destroy, once you show that that's not true, the entire the basis of the continuation of the vaccine program, irrespective of any potential safety signals or actual adverse events, because I'm not talking about that, I'm just talking about whether or not you can die with covid after having been vaccinated. Because if you can, and you can die just as equally and maybe more likely as someone who's unvaccinated, then what the hell are we doing with these vac— what's the point of them? ...

DR. NORMAN FENTON: I did have a prestigious career and I was highly respected but the fact is it did all change as soon as I started to show that the entire covid narrative was driven by these sort of flawed and easily manipulated statistics. And then you know I was suddenly called a conspiracy theorist, a spreader of [mis]information, and from that point on all of my research papers on the subject were censored, I was treated like an academic pariah, you know, colleagues shunned me. ... It was horrendous, but the good news about it is that you do find out who your true friends and colleagues are, and what's more, I have discovered, you know, through the last three years, I have met in person and online people whose views I really respect.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/new-zealand-records-biggest-increase-in-registered-deaths-in-100-years/BQERSTKIANCKRNNA7IL42RD52U/

Why in Australia do we have excess deaths at an 80 year high and why in New Zealand are excess deaths at a 100 year high?? Just curious. It isn't COVID since they are all vaccinated and the vaccines keep you from dying from COVID, right? So what is causing this?

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/colossal-failure-around-world

The COVID-19 vaccines are so ineffective against COVID-19 that they have negative efficacy. This means that you have a greater likelihood of infection and/or hospitalization from COVID-19 after having received the vaccine than not receiving it. The COVID-19 vaccines have not only failed to reduce cases and hospitalizations from Omicron and COVID-19 generally, but they have actually increased the incidence of both. Results of negative efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines are seen all over the world.

Neither the Pfizer nor Moderna clinical trials addressed preventing transmission.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/public-health-scotlands-report-in

Public Health Scotland's report in January and February 2022 showed us back then (with UK data) that the VACCINATED (1 or 2 or 3 doses with dose response) compared to UNVACCINATED were at elevated risk of becoming infected and being a case (see Table 14 and Figure 13); this Scottish report was stopped soon after this report (as well as UK's) given the troubling vaccinated data

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/autopsy-of-fatal-delta-variant-in

So the question on the table is: if the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines raised antibodies against the ancestral wild type Wuhan strain of SARS-CoV-2, would they cover the Delta variant? The only real way to know is to find a case who is fully vaccinated with “protective” antibodies in the bloodstream who contracts COVID-19. Recently such a patient has been reported from Catania, Italy.

Esposito, et al, published an autopsy of an 83 year old man who was admitted to the hospital with heart failure and was later diagnosed with acute COVID-19 and succumbed 18 days later. There is no mention of treatment with lifesaving medications in the McCullough protocol such as ivermectin, corticosteroids, or anticoagulants. Sadly his lungs were ravaged with SARS-CoV-2 despite having adequate antibody titers for the Spike protein generated from the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.

Esposito, M.; Cocimano, G.; Vanaria, F.; Sessa, F.; Salerno, M. Death from COVID-19 in a Fully Vaccinated Subject: A Complete Autopsy Report. Vaccines 2023, 11, 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11010142

The important points of this paper are: 1) the original Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine failed to stop the Delta variant, 2) antibodies are an invalid surrogate of protection and should have never been used 8 times by the US FDA in EUA approvals for extended use of COVID-19 vaccines.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/most-infected-in-covid-outbreak-at-cdc-were-vaccinated-agency-confirms_5297678.html?src_src=ccpvnoe&src_cmp=2023-05-30&utm_source=share-btn-copylink

A COVID-19 outbreak unfolded at a conference held by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) despite most attendees being vaccinated.

About 1,800 CDC staffers and others gathered in April in a hotel in Atlanta, where the CDC is headquartered, for a conference focused on epidemiological investigations and strategies.

The CDC is the greatest threat to public health ever to exist in the US. It is completely captured by Pfizer money and will recommend that you inject feces if Pfizer can make money from that.

In such a case, doctors opposed to the injection of feces will lose funding. Doctors who find that the injection of feces is beneficial with have greatly increasing funding even as millions die from it.

The media will relentlessly promote the injection of feces as "safe and effective" in spite of all evidence.

All US politicians aside perhaps from Rand Paul will claim they have been injected with feces while secretly injecting saline.

All "public health" officials around the world will loudly support the injection of feces, afraid that the evidence against them collected by myriad Epstein clones will be made public.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/venomous-loretta-tuesday-may-30-2023?publication_id=463409&post_id=124791710&isFreemail=true

Last year we saw the first study, not peer-reviewed, claiming a class shift in antibody types in folks taking booster shots. Even covidians were distressed, commenting that, if it were true, it would be a disaster.

Now we have a peer-reviewed study confirming the IgG4 class shift.

The study was remarkable for more than just confirming the class shifting mechanism. I can’t say I’ve ever seen this kind of blunt criticism about the jabs in a study from a major journal before. Normally these studies always carefully parrot the magic words about the jabs’ safety and efficacy, and the ultra-rareness of any side effects.

But right out of the gate, this peer-reviewed study’s abstract stabbed the jabs right in their little myocardic hearts:

As the immunity provided by these vaccines rapidly wanes, their ability to prevent hospitalization and severe disease in individuals with comorbidities has recently been questioned, and increasing evidence has shown that, as with many other vaccines, they do not produce sterilizing immunity, allowing people to suffer frequent re-infections.
Oh boy! The study’s authors knowingly placed themselves squarely sideways with the world’s largest, best-funded, and most vindictive government health bureaucracy, the dystopian Centers for Disease Control, which continues to insist in spite of all evidence to the contrary that covid vaccination magically prevent death or even hospitalization for covid infections.

But it got even better. Next, the authors got to the point: the vaccine-induced IgG4 antibody class shift, which we’ve discussed on C&C before, is a problem, not a feature, a potentially deadly problem:

[R]ecent investigations have found abnormally high levels of IgG4 in people who were administered two or more injections of the mRNA vaccines… [E]merging evidence suggests that the reported increase in IgG4 levels detected after repeated vaccination with the mRNA vaccines may not be a protective mechanism; rather, it constitutes an immune tolerance mechanism to the spike protein that could promote unopposed SARS-CoV2 infection and replication by suppressing natural antiviral responses. Increased IgG4 synthesis due to repeated mRNA vaccination with high antigen concentrations may also cause autoimmune diseases, and promote cancer growth and autoimmune myocarditis in susceptible individuals.
My goodness. What they’re saying is, the safe and effective jabs could make people’s immune systems respond with “tolerance” — ignoring the spike protein altogether, since the body can’t get rid of it, its own cells keep making the damned things — and tolerance of spike could lead to:

1) Autoimmune diseases,

2) Cancer growth, and

3) Autoimmune myocarditis.

By “autoimmune myocarditis” they mean that the body is attacking its own heart. That can’t be good. And it definitely wasn’t good news for people who have dormant cancers.

I wonder if all the people who took the safest vaccines ever created would have wanted to know about this potential teeny-tiny problem before making their decisions?

It’s a terrific study with massive implications, and I just don’t have time to do it justice. But here’s one of my favorite sections:

It is worth noting that there are conflicting pieces of information about the level of protection offered by these vaccines. Although the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States has stated that throughout the pandemic, mortality rates have been higher in the unvaccinated than in the vaccinated, the data in the United Kingdom contradict the CDC’s findings. Specifically, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) in the United Kingdom has reported that from April to mid-November 2021, deaths in unvaccinated people were higher in comparison with vaccinated people who had received a second vaccine dose. However, from the end of November 2021 to December 2022, this situation reverted: deaths were higher in vaccinated people who received a third vaccine dose compared with the unvaccinated.
Haha, the CDC’s statements were “contradicted” by UK data. Good one. They were really saying the CDC is useless. The researchers also suggested the IgG4 class shift as a potential explanation for the sky-high Western excess mortality rates — which is the first time I’ve seen any mainstream source suggest there might be a link between the jabs and the deaths.

In other words, some scientists ARE starting to grapple with the excess mortality problem and they ARE looking at the right potential cause.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/el-gato-malo-excellent-piece-by-el

I myself already had data from Riemersma, Shitrit, Hatemaki, Chao et al. showing vaccinated persons carried massive viral load e.g. and even could spread the virus. Data was showing us that PPE and double vaccinated nurses were transmitting virus and getting infected:

7) Chau et al.looked at transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among vaccinated healthcare workers in Vietnams. Of 69 healthcare workers that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 62 participated in the clinical study, all of whom recovered. For 23 of them, complete-genome sequences were obtained, and all belonged to the Delta variant. “Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020”.

8) Brown et al.In Barnstable, Massachusetts, Brown et al. found that among 469 cases of COVID-19, 74% were fully vaccinated, and that “the vaccinated had on average more virus in their nose than the unvaccinated who were infected.”

9) Hetemäli et al.Reporting on a nosocomial hospital outbreak in Finland, Hetemäli et al. observed that “both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections were found among vaccinated health care workers, and secondary transmission occurred from those with symptomatic infections despite use of personal protective equipment.”

10) Shitrit et al.In a hospital outbreak investigation in Israel, Shitrit et al. observed “high transmissibility of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among twice vaccinated and masked individuals.” They added that “this suggests some waning of immunity, albeit still providing protection for individuals without comorbidities.”

‘Given what we now know about the complete failure of covid vaccines to provide sterilizing immunity, stop infection, or stop spread as well as the fact that such issues were not even tested for in the drug trials that approved them, certain questions would seem to demand asking:

Just what was this “Data from the CDC today” that suggested that “Vaccinated people do not carry the virus?”




Was there, in fact, any data at all?

Or was this a completely fabricated claim used to underpin the mass rollout of a product that failed so spectacularly right out of the gates and:

Where the sorts of safety and inefficacy signals that would have pulled any other vaccine in history off the market were ignored

Where the data collection was rigged to make known adverse events difficult to find, report, and aggregate in the V-safe system by removing them from searchable database fields and placing them in free text response.

And where the mandated safety assessments were not being performed until long after problems were evident, allowing the CDC to miss the most blatant safety signal in history.

There seem to be an awfully large body of claims made by CDC that appear to have lacked foundation in fact or data. Both Dr Walensky and her predecessor Robert Redfield would seem to have a great deal to answer for here.

“The covid vaccine will make the vaccinated a dead end for the virus.”

This talking point was simply everywhere all at once.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla certainly pushed this narrative. Presumably, the fact that he was allowed to do so (itself quite an exceptional situation) implies the acquiescence of FDA, CDC, and other regulators.

Upon what was this seemingly widespread consensus based?

The matter appears to have never even been studied at the time the claims were made.

Why were the usually strict and fastidious US regulators so sanguine about such unusually aggressive and certain statements?

This is a most unusual situation and such an extraordinary outcome would seem to demand an extraordinary explanation.

Yet none seems forthcoming.

https://slaynews.com/news/covid-deaths-triple-vaccinated-government-data-shows/

92% Covid Deaths Are Triple Vaccinated, Government Data Shows

Patrick says

" https://slaynews.com/news/covid-deaths-triple-vaccinated-government-data-shows/ "

From the link:
"The data shows that the fully vaccinated population – three or more shots – accounted for 92% of Covid deaths in England throughout the entirety of 2022."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371342838_Simpson's_Paradox_in_the_correlations_between_excess_mortality_and_COVID-19_injections_a_case_study_of_iatrogenic_pandemic_for_elderly_Australians

Simpson's Paradox in the correlations between excess mortality and COVID-19 injections: a case study of iatrogenic pandemic for elderly Australians
June 2023

... A strong statistical signal (2.5 standard deviations) is shown in this paper in the mortality of elderly Australians, who suffered the greatest relative harm from the injections, even when adjusted for age-dependent high expected mortality. Conclusions: Earlier epidemiological evidence that COVID injections reduce illness and death is now methodologically invalidated, and the claim that the injections are beneficial for the vulnerable is refuted. The injections explain the mystery of significant numbers of non-COVID excess deaths. The Australian pandemic is shown to be iatrogenic particularly for the elderly, who have suffered disproportionate harm. Deliberately ignoring this clear evidence is tantamount to iatrogenic geronticide.

https://jessicar.substack.com/p/in-case-you-thought-getting-more

A new preprint is out entitled: “Risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) among Those Up-to-Date and Not Up-to-Date on COVID-19 Vaccination”1 and it concludes from a multivariate analysis of 48,344 individuals (Employees of Cleveland Clinic) that ‘those not “up-to-date” on COVID-19 vaccination had a lower risk of COVID-19 than those “up-to-date”’.

https://drpanda.substack.com/p/new-study-shakes-vaccination-paradigm

New Study Shakes Vaccination Paradigm: Less Boosters, Lower COVID-19 Risk!
People Who Skipped Boosters LESS LIKELY to get COVID according to new Cleveland Clinic study

https://live2fightanotherday.substack.com/p/cdc-admits-bivalent-boosters-worse

CDC Admits Bivalent Boosters Worse Than Useless

Harmful, actually. In short 4-5 months, more "negative efficacy" than monovalent jabs a year or more earlier.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/distractions-saturday-june-17-2023?publication_id=463409&post_id=129016195&isFreemail=true

A new Cleveland Clinic preprint study published this week, titled “Risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) among Those Up-to-Date and Not Up-to-Date on COVID-19 Vaccination.”

That title seems oddly-worded, but according to the study, the CDC defines people as being “up to date” on their vaccines if they have had at least one dose of the new “bivalent” vaccines, which are the ones the so-called “health agency” has been pushing lately. These are the new and improved jabs including both the original Wuhan-style spike protein as well as the new Omicron flavor.

It’s double the fun. Two spikes in one! And it’s worth every penny you pay for it, too.

Anyway, the hardworking Cleveland Clinic researchers, bless them, looked at 50,000 of the hospital systems’ own employees and compared bivalent jab uptake with covid positive status. Here’s what they found:

Among 48,344 working-aged Cleveland Clinic employees, those not “up-to-date” on COVID-19 vaccination had a lower risk of COVID-19 than those “up-to-date”.

Huh. To be clear: People who take the bivalent shot get MORE covid.




Bwahahaha! It would be tragic if it weren’t so hilarious. The media convinced a lot of gullible people the worst thing that could ever happen to them was catching covid. And now, their magic shots appear to actually INCREASE the chances they will catch the dreaded disease.

I can hear the desperate rejoinder already. “But, but, but,” they’ll stammer, “the bivalent shot decreases risk of hospitalization and death!” Well, maybe, maybe not. Opinions on that vary. But either way, the person who DOESN’T GET COVID has the LOWEST risk of serious illness and hospitalization, since they never encounter the risks to start with.

In other words, even if it’s a lower relative risk, by getting covid more often, the boosted have INFINITELY higher risk of serious illness and death than the unboosted who don’t catch the virus in the first place.

Not to mention what the phenomenon suggests might be going on in boosted people’s immune systems.

There’s another point. The Bivalent shot works backwards. It’s almost like the shot was never designed to prevent covid in the first place.

So.

https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/90667.html

SHAWN BUCKLEY: Right. And so when you use the word immunotoxic you're meaning basically, that it harms the immune system, rather than helps.

DR. CHRIS SHOEMAKER: Yes. And if I could give you a picture of it, everyone, we all understand transplants, we understand if someone's kidney is put into you, or someone's heart is put into you, your own natural immune system would attack the heck out of that transplanted kidney, or attack the heck out of that transplanted heart if the surgeons and the internists didn't give a great degree of immune suppression, very heavy drugs that would make your immune system basically go to sleep so that that new heart or that new kidney could settle into your body.

Here's the problem with spike protein. When spike protein goes into your body the 30 thousand, sorry, 30,000 billion cells in your body, you've got 40,000 billion mRNAs, they have enough to go into every cell of your body, so they're all going in and they're all creating a flag. They are all creating the fact that your body recognizes your heart, is no longer your heart, it's a transplanted heart. Your kidney is no longer your kidney, it's a transplanted kidney, the body thinks, and that's why the body goes after it. And that's why the attacks are so varied. That's why one person could be suffering massively from a hepatitic or a kidney ailment, and another person will have a dissection in the aorta because the aorta is being inflamed by the attack. Or the heart. The typical one is myocarditis in children. Young adolescents, male and female getting pain and troponin elevations* and all the features of myocarditis and it's because your immune system, it's not the spike itself that's harming you, it's your immune system going after the spike that has changed the genetic image of your heart. And your body thinks it's not your heart and that's why it attacks the heck out it.

This is basic immunologic science. The makers of this immunotoxic vaccine knew this. They knew this for a purpose. You can't make this something this damaging to humanity without doing it on purpose. And that is actually my major message of my talk today, is I accuse someone, I can't name them right now, but I accuse some entity of highly purposely making things in the fashion that they did because it would not be as toxic as it is, it would not be so able to highjack your immune system to kill you slowly or quickly if it was not done purposely. It has been done purposely. ...

One terribly important thing to add, and this is probably the best thing, time to mention it, in the last 3 to 4 weeks it has been spoken of extensively by Canada's PhD Dr. Jessica Rose and Sasha Latypova* from the United States, they have made extremely clear that actually it's one third DNA that's in the weight of the shots and two thirds RNA. So fine, two thirds RNA is only 27 trillion. Meanwhile there's 13 trillion actual DNA capsids. DNA. Deoxyribonucleic acid. The kind of stuff that can get into the nucleus of your cell and change that part of you. So now, not just the flag from the
RNA is on the surface, there's actually changed DNA physically inside the nucleus of your many, many cells.

The reason that's there is ostensibly it's poor design. Poor manufacturing. The Department of Defense in the United States which assisted in manufacturing this didn't care that it didn't meet vaccine standards. In fact they did paperwork that specifically describes the injection as a, as a — I don't want to use the wrong word here. A, a, a military countermeasure. A military countermeasure. They didn't call it a bioweapon, huh, but they did call it a military countermeasure, and they specifically didn't call it a vaccine. And the reason was, if you call it a vaccine, it has to be made to vaccine standards, proper world standards for vaccines. By calling it what they did, saying that there was an urgency to it, we'll just call it a military countermeasure, the standards can be dropped. And so what if there's one third as much DNA in this as there in RNA. And this happens when they stir the soup when they make this stuff in great big kettles and cauldrons, it's going to be sludge, it's going to be the original DNA with inside of a bacteria that's helped to make the RNA, but it was allowed to have inefficient and painfully, painfully almost soiled what's going into you is one third DNA, two thirds RNA and that is the truth from Dr. Jessica Rose and Dr. Latypova** if I have the name correct. Horrible.

https://brownstone.org/articles/16-studies-on-vaccine-efficacy/

Here I summarize studies and reports that shed light on vaccine induced immunity against Covid. They highlight the problems with vaccine mandates that are currently threatening the jobs of millions of people. They also raise doubts about the arguments for vaccinating children.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/media-meltdown-tuesday-june-27-2023?publication_id=463409&post_id=131401181&isFreemail=true

🔬 A new jab-cancer study quietly published in Frontiers in Oncology last month:




The researchers injected 14 five-week-old mice with the Pfizer jab, in order to investigate vaccine-induced myocarditis. To their surprise, the day before they ‘harvested’ the mice, one of the cute little rodents died, suddenly and unexpectedly. It had been eating and running around fine the whole time and then — gaaack. There was no sign; it even weighed the same as its mousy peers. No symptoms.

Well, no symptoms till the bitter end, that is.

When the curious scientists opened the little guy up, they found it packed with enlarged organs and lots of cancer. The poor little guy practically burst open. ...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10183601/

Among other things, the mouse’s heart tissue showed some very unusual cells growing on the outer cardiac tissues. The odd cells had distinct features, such as “a large polygonal nuclei” and signs of cell division. Many of these cells were dying, and were present along with immune cells that seemed to have been attacking them. Similar atypical cells were found in the rodent’s liver and kidneys, causing changes to those organs, as well as in many other soft tissues.

I noted this interesting sentence from the abstract: “Our [mouse] case adds to previous clinical reports on malignant lymphoma development following novel mRNA COVID-19 vaccination[.]”

So I did a little — very little — digging. Sure enough! The new Frontiers study joined a steady drip of similar studies published. Here are a few recent ones:

More about the above:

https://ashmedai.substack.com/p/pfizer-cancer-triple-jabbed-mouse

Patrick says

"Vaccinated Australian woman Marion had Covid ten times "

That is because the mRNA vaccine destroyed her immune system, gave her AIDS and made her an easy Covid target.

https://twitter.com/ClownWorld/status/1684319730218459142

https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/94326.html

SENATOR GERARD RENNICK: Oh well, well, here we are the end of 2022 and we've had over 10 million cases of covid. The Australian Health Department of course stopped counting around September sometime because I think it was getting too embarrassing to admit that despite with over 20 million people being vaccinated over half the country had caught covid.

Whatever happened to protecting you? Whatever happened to protecting you? But we don't want to talk about that anymore we'll just pull it off the website and not discuss it. We'll not discuss it. ...

And then we've got the excess deaths that Senator Babet talked about before. We had 8,706 extra deaths last year despite the fact that New South Wales were locked down for three months. So in theory the deaths should have been lower like they were in 2020. But let's not count 2021 in the ABS, ABS [Australian Bureau of Statistics] figures or sorry, 2020 they're not counting, let's pretend nothing happened there.

Almost 140,000 jab injuries, more than all the injuries reported from vaccines since 1971, more than all the injuries put together. You've got a injury rate that's three times higher and yet the TGA don't want to look at the signal. ...

There was not one skerrick of evidence that showed that that vaccine was effective. But did anyone in this chamber right here right now actually read that report? I bet you not. But you all went out there and said it was safe and effective, where you didn't have a clue what you were talking about.

And shame on you. Because the law in this country, the law in this country, in the Australian immunization register says you cannot be coerced into taking a vaccine, number one, and number two, is that you need to be properly informed about what is in the vaccine. ...

You know what they did? They stopped the trial. They stopped the trial, and they went and told everyone that it just stays at the site of injection. Well that was a blatant lie. If you want to talk about misinformation, go and check out page 44 of the Pfizer non-clinical trial report. It was released on the TGA FOIA disclosure log 239-6. I've read it numerous times. ...

And then we've got Professor Kelly, of course he came out and made the bold statement that it stops transmission. Well he was lying, because the FDA came out in December '20 and said that there was no evidence that the vaccine stopped transmission. And when I pressed him on it, there's no trials to show that there's any IgA in the mucosal system. OK, you don't have to take my word for it. Go and speak to Robert Clancy, Australia's foremost immunologist and vaccinologist. OK? He's retired you can trust this guy, he's not on the take from Big Pharma or the big universities that aren't actually interested in research, they're just interested in lining their own pockets. ...

And then of course we've got the vaccine injury scheme, which is just a joke. And today and last night and day after day for the last 15 months I get contacted by people who have had their lives destroyed by this vaccine, a vaccine that the government said was safe and effective.

And if that isn't bad enough that they these people, and I'm looking at you people in this chamber here today, didn't read the documents that took over someone else's body because it suited your narrative, your command and control narrative, you showed no humanity. No humanity.

There are people out there that have not only injured, they have lost their jobs and they cannot get medical support to help them. There are husbands and wives of injured couples who've had to quit their jobs...

I've literally just had three messages in the last hour about people who are losing their jobs, not in the health sector, but in sectors that are outdoors, nothing to do. It is absurd. It is absurd and it needs to stop because the state of emergency, even at the state government level, has been retracted. And yet these people here today do not want to grant people their autonomous right to control what goes in their body.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/vaccinated-persons-side-effects-eg

Vaccinated persons side effects e.g. hospitilization, death etc. were counted as occurring in the UNVACCINATED (by CDC, FDA etc.) for as much as 21/28 days after being vaccinated, lying to you, scaring you to be vaccinated & vaccinate your child, putting deaths in the UNVACCINATED bucket knowing they were already VACCINATED! Walensky, Fauci are criminals for this! ...

The ‘cheap trick’ is simple: categorise those who are vaccinated as unvaccinated up until some arbitrarily defined time period after vaccination takes place. The time period might be 7, 14 or 21 days. The supposed justification for this practice being that the benefits of the vaccine do not accrue until it has had time to ‘kick in’. And before it becomes effective on day seven, fourteen, or whatever, the recipient is considered to be unvaccinated.

At the time of our original work, we were not at all sure how globally widespread this selection bias was. Recently the Dark Horse podcast covered the issue and shortly after Bret Weinstein asked me if there was a comprehensive list of studies that had deliberately committed this cheap trick.

This article is our first attempt to provide such a list. It contains a mix of observational and other studies that have employed the cheap trick when assessing vaccine effectiveness for either infection, hospitalisation or death.